See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/367655839

VERY HIGH RATE TM DOWNLINK USING GMSK WITH SIMULTANEOUS

PSEUDO NOISE RANGING

Conference Paper · November 2022

CITATIONS READS

0 109

8 authors, including:

Renato Carbone Davide Rovelli

Thales Alenia Space in Italy European Space Agency
2 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS 15 PUBLICATIONS 50 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Renato Carbone on 03 February 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 VERY HIGH RATE TM DOWNLINK USING GMSK WITH SIMULTANEOUS PSEUDO
NOISE RANGING

R. Carbone(1), D. Gelfusa(2), M. Matta(2), M. Luise(3), M. Della Maggiora(3), D. Rovelli(4), G. Sessler(5)

(1), (2)
Thales Alenia Space
(1)
Turin Plant - Strada Antica di Collegno, 253 - 10146 Torino (Italy)
Email: Renato.Carbone@ThalesAleniaSpace.com
(2)
Rome Plant – via Saccomuro, , 24 - 00131 Roma (Italy)
Email: Dario.Gelfusa @ThalesAleniaSpace.com, Marco.Matta @ThalesAleniaSpace.com
(3)
Wiser
Via Fiume 23, 57123 Livorno (Italy )
Email: Marco.Luise@wiser.it, Marco.Dellamaggiora@wiser.it
(4)
ESA - ESTEC
(4) Keplerlaan 1, Postbus 299 - 2200 AG Noordwijk (The Netherlands)
Email:Davide.Rovelli@esa.int
(5)
ESA- ESOC
Robert Bosch Straße 5, 64293 Darmstadt (Germany)
Email: Gunther.Sessler@esa.int
INTRODUCTION
Future science mission and in particular the ESA M5 mission EnVision, a Venus orbiter aimed to investigate the planet
from its interior to its atmosphere at an unprecedented scale of resolution by means of 5 instruments and 1 experiment
(an S-band Synthetic Aperture Radar, a Subsurface Radar, 3 spectrometers and a radio science experiment), will require
up to 300 Msps telemetry symbol rates to transmit the generated scientific data to Earth. In this configuration, the
simultaneous transmission of a dual PN (pseudo noise) ranging in both X- and Ka-band to perform radio science
experiments is considered an asset.
Considering the above needs, the active CCSDS standard foresees the usage of a specific signal modulation GMSK
(Gaussian Minimum Shift Keying) when increasing the data rates in parallel to the transmission of the pseudo noise
ranging signal in the deep space Ka band (32 GHz). GMSK plus simultaneous PN ranging, with lower TM rates, has
already been achieved for the Solar Orbiter mission in X-band. However, at present the on board transponder has limited
capabilities in terms of respectively transmitting GMSK at very high symbol rates, reaching only few Msps. In addition,
the combination of the very high rate GMSK telemetry with PN ranging at much lower chip rate value has only been
added recently to the CCSDS standard (addition of cancelling the ranging signal before telemetry demodulation).
Moreover some prospective satellite missions might require PN ranging chip rate to TM rate ratios, which go even beyond
the cases studied in the current CCSDS standard.
Considering the improvement required at both spacecraft and ground station level to achieve the high data rate and very
low Telemetry over Ranging rates ratio capabilities including the ranging and telemetry cancellation technique in the
receiver chain, a specific technology development activity have been funded by ESA.
The paper presents the outcome of such development activity, performed by Thales Alenia Space in collaboration with
Wiser, which objective was to study and breadboard the simultaneous transmission (maintaining coherency of the phase
of the downlink signal to the uplink to allow range-rate measurement) and reception of a very high rate (up to 300 Msps)
GMSK telemetry (TM) signal with Pseudo Noise ranging (RNG) at low and high chip rates and to prepare a roadmap for
using this signal modulation in future very data high rate on-board and ground downlink systems, with special focus on
the deep space Ka-Band.
In particular, for the on-board modulator the goal was to identify a solution suitable for implementation in the current
space qualified technology and identifying a suitable roadmap for the implementation in the Flight Model, taking into
account the Envision schedule needs. For the ground demodulator, the study analysed the potential benefits of using the
new CCSDS 401.0-B 2.4.22A/B recommendation for TM / RNG ranging signal cancellation from the combined PN
ranging and GMSK signal respectively before RNG / TM demodulation in achieving better TM and RNG performance
that would be important in a scenario with large differences between the ranging and TM rates.
PHASE 1 - DEFINITION
The first phase had the objective to identify and refine the set of requirements, confirming the feasibility, defining the
architecture and describing the chosen implementation suitable to the current space qualified technology.

TTC 2022
System Analysis
ESA M5 Envision mission, a Venus scientific orbiter planned to be launched in 2031, has been considered as reference
for the system analysis being the first mission asking for very high rate downlink with a potential need of parallel PN
ranging. Envision communication system foresees an X-X-Ka link to support downlink of about 81Gb/day science data
volume over a large Earth-S/C range distance (0.3 to 1.74 AU) and facing frequent occultation by Venus due to low orbit.
The science data will be mainly downloaded via the Ka-band link being the one with the largest bandwidth.
The analysis focused on the identification of the optimal symbol rates set and residual Doppler to be managed on Rx side.
The symbol rate set optimization was aimed to maximize the achievable data volume avoiding system oversizing and
considering the use of a variable rate scheme during pass.
The optimization consider the full science phase for all launch scenarios (i.e. from November 2034 to March 2040), the
use of 35m Estrack G/S, an on-board Communication system characterized by a Ka-band EIRP of 102dBm and takes into
account the link margin variability due to S/C elevation, solar noise and Venus noise, the latter playing a key role at short
Earth-S/C distances.
The resulting SNR dynamic range and variation during each downlink pass are the key parameters that, together with the
channel usage efficiency % and the constraint on the max number of rates during a pass identified by the SGICD (4 rates
per pass), lead to identify the range and the granularity of the optimal symbol rates set.
A geometric progression has been considered as the optimal alphabet implementing the symbol rate granularity since it
allows to best fit the SNR variation limiting at same time the number of rates. Assuming the use of Turbo coding scheme,
the resulting optimal set of symbol rates is made of 17 rates from 2.9Msps to 290Msps.
Concerning the Envision Doppler scenario and the Doppler compensation capabilities offered by the Ground Station,
which are bounded by the orbital prediction errors of up to 3 m/s in range-rate and 50 mm/s2 in range-rate-rate, and
considering a 20% margin added on top, the resulting Doppler figures and the relevant proposed requirement for the
receiver are reported in Fig. 1.
On board Transmitter Architecture
The stringent requirements in terms of TM symbol rate in GMSK mode implies a revision of the traditional modulation
scheme adopted for on-board GMSK telemetry generation.
In this chapter a review of the Digital Signal Processing (DSP) updates needed to fulfil this new scenario is analysed and
the modulator performance are evaluated.
Traditional DSP applicable to symbol rates up to 10 Msps is represented in the block diagram in Fig. 2.
According [1], incoming TM data are pre-coded in order to remove the differential encoding implicit in the GMSK
modulation thus improving the overall link performance.
Very high GMSK telemetry rate plus PN Ranging generation approach
The traditional DSP approach has to be revisited in view of achieving the required GMSK symbol rate up to 290 Msps.
A Parallel DSP architecture had to be designed in order to make the sampling frequency compatible with state-of-art
space-qualified FPGA and to match compatible D/A converter featuring a built-in 4 to 1 digital multiplexer (MuxDAC).
Consequently, the chosen number of samples per symbols for GMSK shaping is 4 to be compatible with said parallel
processing.

Envision Reference Proposed

Transponder Scenario Requirement
Mode Doppler Doppler Doppler Doppler
Shift Rate Shift Rate
Non-Coherent ±1.8 ±0.8
MHz kHz/s ±5.0 ±2.0
Coherent ±3.6 ±1.6 MHz kHz/s
MHz kHz/s

Fig. 1: Envision Doppler scenario (left) and receiver Doppler scenario with Doppler
compensation (right)
TTC 2022
 Clock Domain @ Data Rate Clock Domain @ 8xData Rate

To DACs
TM Data Data I/F
Differential
Coding
Gaussian
Shaping  CORDIC
sin/cos

Fig. 2: GMSK modulation approach

The Pseudo-Noise Ranging (RNG) numeric signal is processed employing a dedicated parallel DSP chain that includes
chip-shaping and interpolator modules. TM symbol phase is added to the PN-RNG signal to obtain the total TM GMSK
plus RNG symbol phase.
The parallel DSP architecture designed for Very high-rate GMSK plus RNG modulation is reported in Fig. 3. It is
characterized by the main points outlined here below:
 System clock is equal to 4Rs or 1.16 GHz, being the maximum symbol rate Rs=290 Msps. This clock is divided
by 4 by the MuxDAC(s) and then used as FPGA clock for the GMSK plus RNG blocks that perform the DSP.
 All the GMSK plus RNG blocks inside the FPGA operate at symbol rate of 290 Msps. Data interface and the
pre-coding modules function in sequential mode. Subsequent blocks (i.e. Gaussian/PN shaping, phase integrator,
CORDIC-based trigonometric functions computation) are implemented in a parallel fashion at 4 samples per
symbols to minimize the sampling rate along the digital modulating chain.
 The parallel interpolators include both integer interpolator stages (CIC filter based) and fractional (Farrow filter
based). CIC filters are in charge to interpolate by multiples of 4, Farrow filters are optimized to provide
interpolation from 1 to 4, thus covering all needed combinations.
 Due to this flexible symbol rate scenario, a processor (either on-FPGA and/or on-board) is in charge to configure
the architecture parameters (e.g. interpolation factors, PN initialization values, modulation indexes) through a
dedicated data bus. Moreover it configures and interfaces to ancillary blocks (i.e. the external PLL that generates
the 1.16GHz clock reference) using a serial interface.
 The in-phase and quadrature digital samples at the output of each CORDIC block is delivered to the relevant
MuxDAC which is in charge of digital multiplexing at system clock (1.16 GHz) and D/A conversion.

Integrator FPGA

Clock domain : 4 x TLM symbol rate Z-1

Trigonometric Multiplexing &
Functions Digital-to-Analog
Gaussian Shaping Conversions

CORDIC
FIR0 interpolator sin/cos
I/Q Modulating Analogue Signals
(to low-pass filters)

CORDIC
FIR1 interpolator sin/cos
TM Data

Differential muxDAC
Data I/F
Coding (I)
muxDAC
CORDIC
FIR2 interpolator
sin/cos

CORDIC
FIR4 interpolator
sin/cos
Clock domain :
4 x TLM symbol rate
Fclk/4
290 MHz
Fclk=
1.16 GHz
interpolator

interpolator
PN Ranging
Code Polyphase Integer PLL
Chip Shaping interpolator
Generator
interpolator

PN Ranging PLL
Serial
interface
Clock domain : 8 x PN ranging chip rate
TLM CLK
FROM OBC
uP

Fig. 3: Very High Rate Telemetry + PN Ranging on-board transmitter architecture

TTC 2022
 Fig. 4: VHDL RTL simulations. Upper figures: VHDL (left) direct comparison with [2] (right): RRNG = 3 RTM,
BTs=0.5, T4B code. Lower figures: VHRT TX configurations: 290MSps (left) and 9.18MSps (right)

On-Board VHRT Architecture preliminary Validation

A comparative analysis referred to [2] has been performed in order to assess the requirements and validate the architectural
model at Register transfer level (RTL). In addition to this, in this document two preliminary tests in envisaged
transmission scenarios are reported in Fig. 4. All tests confirm and validate the architecture for VHRT transmitter.
Ground Modem Architecture
Fig. 5 shows the overall ground receiver architecture. The ground receiver is summarily composed of a Common Multirate
Front-End to manage the different telemetry and chip rates, a Frequency Acquisition Device (FAD) helping the residual
Doppler compensation during the acquisition phase, and 2 parallel receivers, one for TM reception with RNG cancellation,
the other for RNG reception with TM cancellation.
TM
The oversampling factor of the telemetry receiver N OV is set to 4, whereas the oversampling factor of the ranging receiver
RG
N OV depends on the scenario ID, i.e. on the ratio R  RRG RTM , and can be 4, 8, 16, or 32. In the case of the same
oversampling factor, a single step performed through a Common Multirate Front-End is enough for both receivers.
RG
Differently, when NOV  NOV
TM
, the common multi-rate telemetry front-end provides a data flow with a rate selected for
TM
ranging ( NOV RTM ), whereas the final adaptation to the telemetry sample rate 4RTM is performed by a second CIC
(Telemetry CIC) included at the input of the telemetry receiver chain. In the case of common oversampling factor, this
second CIC is bypassed.
From specifications, considering the X/Ka-band coherent communication mode and taking into account safety margins,
max
the ground receiver faces a maximum absolute value of residual Doppler shift DSRES  800 Hz and a maximum absolute
value of residual Doppler rate DRRESmax
 13 Hz/s. In particular, the magnitude of DS RES
max
compared with the PLL bandwidth
at the minimum telemetry rate RTM , forces the use of a FAD during the signal initial acquisition phase, to be subsequently
switched off for timing/phase loop acquisition and tracking mode. Differently, it has been verified that the residual
max
Doppler Rate DRRES has a negligible impact on the phase acquisition performance, even in the worst case. The FAD has
been designed to estimate the residual Doppler shift DSRES with an estimation variance (jitter) compatible with the lock-
max
in range of our second-order PLL in the worst operating condition: RTM = 2.9 Msps, ES N0 = -8 dB, Doppler rate DRRES
, and a random initial phase error. From theoretical analyses and simulations, it was determined that the PLL can sustain
a maximum Doppler shift of approximately 17 Hz. Therefore, this is the accuracy requirement that must be met by the
FAD that is based on the open-loop Luise-Reggiannini (L-R) algorithm [3].
Concerning the telemetry receiver (upper part of Fig. 5), the carrier phase estimation/recovery is performed by a second-
PLL
order PLL with a normalized equivalent band Beq TS = 10-5, whereas the first-order timing loop for signal alignment has

TTC 2022
 Fig. 5. Overall ground receiver architecture
been designed with a normalized equivalent band BeqDLLTS = 10-5. The two loops for phase and timing recovery must work
together in order to effectively implement coherent discriminators, with better performance at lower Es/N0 values. The
telemetry receiver is equipped with a TM lock monitor whose work thresholds are set by the SNR estimator being
dependent on the application scenario. In order to locally reconstruct the TM signal to be able to cancel it on the ranging
side, specific algorithms have been designed to resolve the intrinsic ambiguities to the differential encoding and phase;
RG
furthermore, the reconstructed telemetry signal is oversampled with N OV , then it is resampled to obtain the pre-DLL
timing scale and, finally, it is correctly aligned with the signal at the input of the ranging receiver.
Concerning the ranging receiver, the local replica of the chip pulse is stored in a LUT and is aligned to the received signal
DLL
through a coherent DLL with a normalized equivalent band Beq TC = 10-7. This approach allows for firmware
simplification and, at DLL steady-state, returns an aligned chip for a direct local ranging reconstruction and cancellation
on the telemetry side. During the initial acquisition phase, an alternate local code (-1)n is used to avoid the code ambiguity,
the performance of which is slightly worse in terms of timing and phase jitter (Fig. 7-B), but still sufficient to initiate
ranging generation and cancellation. Thanks to the long integration times (0.01 s), the DLL performance in terms of jitter
loss does not depend on the ES N0 values and they are very close to the related Cramer Rao Bound (CRB). Also, the

Fig. 6. TM Symbol Error Rate (SER or BER). R = 0.0103 (A- left), R = 1.1022 (B- right)

TTC 2022
 Fig. 7. Ranging performance. A-left: Lock monitor for different working cases. B-right: ranging
delay jitter with perfect TM cancellation

ranging receiver is equipped with a ranging lock monitor that, in addition to detect the unlock events, it is also used to
perform the alignment of TM for the purpose of cancellation.
Preliminary validation
The reception performance in terms of TM SER resulting from a complete test campaign, as well as the timing/phase
jitter curves related to the same scenarios, show that the presence of ranging signal causes more interference (greater TM
SER loss) for scenarios where RTM  RRG and for high ranging modulation indexes mRG . Given the range of symbol/chip
rates requested by the application, these configurations are frequent. Therefore, although there are scenarios for which
ranging signal represents tolerable interference, the cancellation of the ranging signal at the input of the telemetry receiver
results necessary.
Fig. 6 shows the resulting SER curves for two scenario IDs, when the ranging signal is not cancelled, i.e., it acts as a full
interference. As expected, the worst case is represented by green curve ( mRG = 0.7) in Fig. 6A, where RTM = 290 Msps
and RRG = 3 Mcps. Taking into account the order of magnitude of the ranging delay jitter, the cancellation of the locally
reconstructed ranging on the overall signal appears very efficient, with a resulting telemetry SER coinciding with that
obtained in the absence of ranging signal.
On the other hand, the efficiency of telemetry cancellation depends on the SER, therefore on the ratio ES N0 . For any
target scenario, clearing the telemetry is absolutely necessary for the ranging DLL to converge. Fig. 7A shows the ranging
lock monitor for scenario RTM = 290 Msps and RRG = 3 Mcps, for six working cases, from left to right: perfect TM
cancellation, no cancellation (ranging acquisition is not possible), and cancellation with 4 different SER values.
Fig. 7B shows the ranging delay jitter vs EC N0 in the case of perfect TM cancellation, for TB2, TB4, and alternate
codes, in comparison with the related CRB.
PHASE 2 - IMPLEMENTATION
The second phase was aimed to the implementation of breadboards for both on-board transmitter and ground receiver and
the evaluation of their performance in terms of both telemetry and ranging, including end-to-end test campaign.
On board Transmitter: Breadboarding & Testing
In this section a brief overview the transmitter breadboard and test campaign is reported. The test setup includes a digital
section that mounts a XILINX Virtex6 FPGA and two E2V MuxDACs by Teledyne, an analogue section comprising I/Q
BalUns and reconstruction low-pass filters, the RF X-band 8 GHz downlink section which includes a HMC-8191 I/Q
modulator. The resulting downlink signal is analyzed using a Rohde&Shwarz Signal&Spectrum analyzer that includes a
Vector Signal Analyzer (VSA) and Demodulator function.
During VHRT transmitter test campaign the spectral properties and modulation vector were analyzed and the compliance
with the relevant ECSS recommendations in [1] was analyzed. Regarding spectral properties, the downlink signal
spectrum was compared to the recommended spectral masks. The emission mask test results is reported in Table 1 and
an example of measure is shown in Fig. 8. It was the ratio between the TM data and RNG chip rates is close to one, the
spectrum of VHRT TX signal fails to comply with the ECSS recommendation. In the other cases, the emission mask test
is passed.

TTC 2022
 Table 1: VHRT spectral emission mask test results

Symbol Chip RNG Mod

GMSK
Rate Rate Index [rad/pk]
BTs
[Msps] [Mcps] 0 0.2 0.35 0.7
0.25 Y Y Y Y
24.000
0.5 Y Y Y Y
290.000
0.25 Y Y Y Y
3.000
0.5 Y Y Y Y
0.25 Y Y Y Y
24.000
0.5 Y Y Y Y
163.125
0.25 Y Y Y Y
3.000
0.5 Y Y Y Y
0.25 Y Y Y Y
68.818 24.000
0.5 Y Y Y Y
0.25 Y N N N
21.775 24.000
0.5 Y N N N
0.25 Y Y Y Y
9.186 3.000
0.5 Y Y Y Y
0.25 Y Y Y N Fig. 8: Spectral emission test, example of TM 21.775 MSps
2.907 3.000
0.5 Y Y Y N

Table 2: TM-only constellation test results

TM Symbol EVM RMS I/Q subc. angle Amplitude Imbalance I/Q suppression
GMSK BT
Rate [MSps] (<5%) [%] offset (<5°) [degs] (<0.5 dB) [dB] (>21 dB) [dB]
0.25 3.61 3.83 0.26 28.96
290.000
0.5 4.61 4.38 0.28 27.84
0.25 2.00 3.52 0.14 30.01
163.125
0.5 2.26 3.7 0.16 29.64
0.25 1.80 0.19 0.08 46.93
68.818
0.5 2.10 0.25 0.07 46.94
0.25 1.92 0.48 0.18 39.16
21.775
0.5 2.06 0.46 0.18 39.17
0.25 1.73 0.43 0.16 40.03
9.186
0.5 1.65 0.35 0.14 41.51
0.25 1.63 0.39 0.14 41.48
2.907
0.5 1.41 0.35 0.14 41.51

Concerning the demodulation test, the transmitted constellation vectors (TM only) were measured according to the
specifications in [1] in terms of: Error Vector Modulation (EVM), I/Q subcarrier angle offset, Amplitude Imbalance, and
I/Q suppression. All the figures reported in Table 2 show full compliance with the ECSS recommendations.
Ground Modem: Breadboarding and End-to-End tesiting
Concerning the end-to-end test campaign, VHRT modulator and demodulator breadboards are integrated to verify the
complete function. The test bench proposed for validating the very high-rate GMSK with simultaneous PN ranging is
depicted in Fig. 9. It features the On-board Modulator Breadboard, On-ground Modem Breadboard, RF channel including
frequency conversion from X-Band to IF (530MHz), Additive White Gaussian Noise (AWGN), RF/IF filtering,
Frequency synthesizers for clock and Local Oscillator (LO) generation, data generation and BER testing for GMSK link
performance characterization, Spectrum analyzer for RF spectrum measurements, Logic Analyzer for FPGA(s)
debugging, Personal Computers (PC) for on-board and on-ground breadboards configuration and monitoring.
The On-Ground breadboard includes a XILINX Zynq UltraScale+ RFSoC ZCU111 Evaluation Kit and the XM500
breakout board that is used as A/D front-end for the receiver demodulator. The On-board Modulator, the On-ground
Modem and the LO used to convert the down-link modulated signal to the receiver IF (i.e. 1.16 MHz, which 4 times the
maximum TLM symbol rate) share the same master oscillator at 10 MHz. This approach allows a precise control of the
frequency estimated by the On-ground Modem when demodulating the down-link signal; moreover, any kind of Doppler
profile can be programmed on the down-link carrier frequency and GMSK symbol rate. A dedicated high-rate Bit Error
Rate (BER) meter with configurable reference sequence was designed and implemented on the RX breadboard
specifically to handle the high TM data rates up to 290MSps.

TTC 2022
 Logic Logic
Analyzer On-board Modulator Analyzer
Ground modem
Configuration & Debugging
Configuration & Debugging

Noise
UART Generator UART

Tx,CE Rx,CE

530 MHz LPF 8 GHz On-board

On-ground moodem 1.3 GHz Modulator
530
MHz

8.53 GHz
Demodulated
data
LO

TLM PN
BER generator
Meter

10 MHz
1.16 GHz

On-ground On-board
Modem 10 MHz
Tx
Freq. Ref. reference
Freq. Ref.

Fig. 9: VHRT end to end complete breadboard

1,E+00
SER (theory)
SER TM only
1,E-01 Doppler +800Hz
Doppler -800Hz
3MCPS 0.2rad/pk
SER

1,E-02
3MCPS 0.35rad/pk
3MCPS 0.7rad/pk
1,E-03 24MCPS 0.2rad/pk
24MCPS 0.35rad/pk

1,E-04 24MCPS 0.7rad/pk

-10,0 -5,0 0,0 5,0 10,0
Es/N0
Fig. 10: SER curves for TM without RNG cancellation
At the time of writing, the demodulator breadboard is planned to be tested in an end-to-end approach in several scenarios.
Performance of the TM demodulator will be evaluated in terms of TM SER (Symbol Error Rate) in presence of noise,
Doppler and Doppler Rate profiles. The Ranging processor will be tested in terms of PN Ranging acquisition time and
PN Ranging delay measurement and stability.
In a first test campaign, TM SER was evaluated without RNG cancellation. In this case, where TM symbol rate is
290MSps and RNG chip rate is 3 and 24Mcps, the VHRT demodulator treats RNG as additional additive noise over the
TM signal. The curves in Fig. 10 show that the receiver performance is in line with the expected reference theoretic SER
of a BPSK demodulator in absence of Doppler and RNG, with an implementation loss < 1dB. The presence of RNG in
the TM data acts as additive noise.

REFERENCES
[1] ECSS-E-ST-50-05-C, “Radio frequency and modulation”, October 2011
[2] “Simultaneous Transmission of GMSK Telemetry and PN Ranging”, Informational Report Green Book, CCSDS
413.1-G-1, May 2017.
[3] M. Luise and R. Reggiannini, “Carrier Frequency Recovery in All-Digital Modems for Burst-Mode
Transmissions,” IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 43, no 2/3/4, pp. 1169-1178, April 1995.

TTC 2022

View publication stats